my views on the local news in Minnesota

Local Government

April 15, 2008

Last week, Dakota County Commissioner Joseph Harris
expressed anger and frustration at the Met Council's insistence that
Chub Lake be included in the County's Parks System Plan as a possible
regional park site. ThisWeek reported:

Dakota
County commissioners unexpectedly became champions of local control as
they recommended adoption of the Park System Plan in a committee
meeting April 8.

The
issue surfaced after Commissioner Joe Harris challenged the
Metropolitan Council’s authority to override a previous County Board
decision.

While
being given final committee review of the much-discussed Park System
Plan, expected for final approval Tuesday, Harris objected to Eureka
Township’s Chubb Lake again identified as a future regional park.

County Planner Mary Jackson told the board the county’s plan was changed at the request of the Met Council staff.

The news prompted Harris, who represents rural areas, to ask, “Is this our plan or their plan?”

“It’s our plan …,” Jackson said.

Harris interrupted her, saying, “So, who runs the county here?”

Answering his own question, Harris continued.

“The
County Board. Not the Metropolitan Council staff and not the
Metropolitan Council. Now, I thought we had board direction that Chubb
Lake is not to be looked at for a possible future park at this
particular time.”

Harris then challenged his colleagues.

“I would ask this board: who’s running this county?”

Then
the Board voted unanimously to remove the reference to Chub Lake as a
regional park site from the County's Parks System Plan.

The
article went on to describe other areas of disagreement between the
County and the Met Council. Dakota County is not alone in this. The
Association of Minnesota Counties, concerned with the Met Council's
growing power, is drafting legislation that would eliminate the Met
Council completely. According to State Rep. Mary Liz Holberg,
R-District 36A, the Met Council's power would make it hard to pass such
a bill at this time.

September 14, 2007

Local elections (county level and
below) are probably more important to the average Joe and Jane Taxpayer
because those elections have a more direct effect on their day to day
lives.

In Eureka Township, where I live with my husband, there are people who at this very moment are putting together recommendations to submit to the township to take away property owners' rights. No-one's talking about putting the recommendations on any ballot to be voted on by the township's citizens on election day. Instead, the Eureka Township Strategic Vision Citizen Advisory Committee will submit its recommendations to the appointed members of the Planning Commission, who will then make their recommendations to the Eureka Town Board.

The Eureka Town Board may then decide to adopt these recommendations in the form of township ordinances. To do this, the board will publish ten days' notice of a public hearing in the legal notices section of the local paper (how many people actually read these?), hold a public hearing and then decide what to enact. The published notice will not go into any detail about what exactly is being considered.

The Eureka Town Board could, if it decided to, submit new land use and zoning regulations to the voters. This has not, however, been its practice. Since 2005, the Eureka Town Board has re-written its ordinances four times, and is about to do so a fifth time, without submitting any of the changes to the voters.

Although the more streamlined process of publishing a short notice in the paper followed by a public hearing and a decision by the Board is certainly more efficient than submitting important questions to the voters, democratic government is not supposed to be efficient. The Nazis were efficient. Businesses try to be efficient in order to remain profitable. But democratic government is supposed to have different purposes and goals.

This type of governmental efficiency has become more and more common. We are accustomed to thinking that we are a democracy because we have elections, and that it is our responsbility as citizens to vote on election day. The fact is, important local government decisions that affect our most basic rights are being made right and left every day without any voter input at all. This is not simply because people don't vote on election day, but because those in power do not want their input. Perhaps because they believe that the voters are too stupid, or too much attached to their individual rights, to vote the "right" way.

We need to do more than just show up on election day and vote. We need to remind our elected representatives that they are doing our business. We need to insist that they do that business in the light of day. We need to inform ourselves and each other about what's going on. We need to tell our elected representatives not to abdicate their responsbility to make policy decisions and instead hand those determinations over to bean counters, scientists, single purpose agencies or organizations, or others who have no accountability to the voters and place no importance on individual rights.